The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-05-03
THE GKAND JURY FIAsCO.

The decision of Judge Irwin relative to the
grand jury and the tally-shaet forgeries could
hardly be surprise to those who had looked
at the question in all its bearings, and much
as the Journal regrets the necessity for the
decision it cannot withhold its approval. The
court decides, in effect, that it cannot usurp
the functions of the grand jury nor attempt
to coerce them in matter wherein they acted
on their oaths and within the legallv-pre-
scribed sphere of their duties. ga grand
jury" says Judge Irwin, "when duly organ
lied becomes, in one sense a coordinate au-
thority with the court" That is to say, it is
recognized by the law as an independent part
of the machinery of justice, whose functions,
powers and duties prescribed by the law,
and in the discharge of which, within certain
limitations. it cannot be controlled. To
quote again from Judge Irwin: Gas
to matters of fact they alone must
determine The court neither keeps
their consciences nor can control them
in finding facts" 1t follows from this that
the court could not graft the request of three
members of the jury to be relieved from fur
Their service with the other three. Such re-
lease would be tantamoupt to decision by
the court that the three excused members
were right and the other three wrong in the
matter of the tally-sheet forgeries-a decision
which, however it might accord with the
Judges personal convictions, would clearly be
extrajudicial and would set the dangerous
precedent of drawing partisan lines in the ad-
ministration of law. Much as we regret the
necessity for the decision and the
legal conditions which require it, we are
bound to say it is right. What then9
Are the three Democratic members of the
grand jury Justified Not by any means. No
more than embezzler who snaps his fingers
at the law from beyond the Canadian line or a
known criminal who is acquitted for lack of
legal evidence. They are simply where the
law cannot reach them and where no human
power compel them to be honest. It is a
case of paralyzed law and failure of justice.
What are the facts9 An open, palpable, out
rageous. fagitious crime was perpetrated The
evidence of the crime was photographed
and seen by thousands of persons. Circum-
stances pointed plainly to the perpetrators. In
the investigation before the grand jury the evil
dence was clear and conclusive as to who the
guilty parties were. Three members of the jury
have united in written statement that the
evidence both direct and circumstantial, was
such as to leave no doubt whatever in their
minds to the perpetrators of the crime.
Yet three members of the jury, political
friends of the guilty parties, positively and
Well might the judge say that the case is I'M
precedented in the annals of criminal pro-
cedure-three honest men asking to be ex-
cused from service grand jury with three
others who refused to indct the perpetrators
of a notorious crime. But the paralysis of
the law and the shameless conduct of the
three sympathizers with crime do not change
the facts in the case. The crime is still
there, and its evidence still exists. The per-
petrators and their friends are before the com
munity. Both are thus far exempt from pun
ishment, simply because in one case the law
has been thwarted, and in the other it fur
nishes no machinery for compelling men to be
honest. 1t remains to be seen whether way
can yet be found to unearth the rascals and
bring them to justice, or whether an out
ragged community will have to endure daily
association with the unconvicted felons and
their perjured allies.